2021 (4) TMI 1261 - HC - Customs

Bail granted in Customs Act case after 35-day custody. Conditions imposed to prevent obstruction of justice.

The High Court granted bail to the accused-petitioner in a DRI case under the Customs Act, 1962. Bail was set at Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the ... Seeking grant of bail - recovery from different persons and the value thereof is below ₹ 1 crore or not - bailable offence or not - HELD THAT:- The accused petitioner is in custody with effect from 4.3.2021 and, as such, for a period of 35 days as on date. Considering this the petitioners are granted bail. Accordingly, the accused-petitioner, shall be released on bail in connection with the case aforementioned on his furnishing bail bond of ₹ 25,000/- with two suitable sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (Metro) at Guwahati. Petition allowed. Issues: Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for accused in DRI case under Customs Act, 1962.Analysis:The judgment delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hitesh Kumar Sarma pertains to a bail application made under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by the accused-petitioner, Joydeep Bhattacharjee, in connection with DRI Case No. 19/CL/IMP/BP & PS/DRI/GZU/2020-21 dated 04.03.2021 registered under Sections 7(1) and 11 of the Customs Act, 1962. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the offences involved in the case are bailable due to the valuation of the property and the fact that the recovery is below Rs. 1 crore and from different persons.The accused-petitioner had been in custody since 4.3.2021, totaling 35 days as of the hearing date. Taking into consideration the submissions made, the Court granted bail to the petitioner. The bail was set at Rs. 25,000/- along with two suitable sureties of the same amount, to be furnished to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (Metro) at Guwahati. The bail order was subject to certain conditions to ensure compliance and prevent any interference with the investigation or tampering with evidence.The conditions imposed on the accused-petitioner included restrictions such as not leaving the territorial jurisdiction without prior permission, refraining from interfering with the investigation or tampering with evidence, and not making any inducement, threat, or promise to dissuade individuals from disclosing facts related to the case. The bail application was disposed of in accordance with the aforementioned conditions, thereby concluding the judgment delivered by the High Court.